alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Avochon T. POSTELL, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 11-10646

Non-Argument Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

Oct. 3, 2011.

Karen L. Atkinson, William T. Zloch, U.S. Attorney’s Office, West Palm Beach, FL, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Wifredo A. Ferrer, U.S. Attorney, Lisa A. Hirsch, Kathleen M. Salyer, Anne R. Schultz, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Miami, FL, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before TJOFLAT, MARTIN and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Avochon Postell, the appellant, is serving a sentence for bank robbery that was *761imposed by the district court on November 19, 2004. On December 14, 2010, he sent the district court a letter, which the court treated as a motion for drug treatment while incarcerated. The court denied the motion, and Postell, proceeding *pro se,*now appeals.

The authority to grant Postell’s request lies with the Federal Bureau of Prisons, not the district court. 8 U.S.C. 8621(b), (e); *Cook v. Wiley,*208 F.3d 1314 (11th Cir.2000). The court’s decision denying relief is therefore

Affirmed.
#### PIZETTI V. THE STATE.

Crime.

(Decided July 2, 1907.)

Appeal from Mobile City Court.

Heard before Hon. O. J. Semmes.

G. T. McGoryey, for appellant.

Alexander M. Garber, Attorney General, for the State.

Affirmed.

Opinion by

Dowdell J.

Tyson C. J., Anderson and McClellan, JJ., concur.
#### SHAPIRO et al., Appellants, v. FRIEDMAN, Respondent.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

October 4, 1907.)

Action by Abraham Shapiro and another against Adolph Friedman.

No opinion. Judgment of the Municipal Court affirmed, with costs.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Charles Hamilton, Also Known as Charles Yates, Appellant.

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Vaughn, J.), rendered January 5, 1983, convicting him of murder in the second degree and attempted robbery in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing, of the defendant’s motion to suppress statements.

Judgment affirmed.

We note at the outset the overwhelming evidence of guilt of the crimes upon which the defendant was convicted, to wit, felony murder and attempted robbery in the first degree. The testimony of an accomplice provided the details of the robbery attempt by the defendant and his codefendants Joseph and Buford Byrd, during which the defendant, armed with a gun, shot and killed one Abraham Squires. This testimony was amply corroborated by (1) the testimony of an eyewitness, (2) evidence found on the defendant at the time of his arrest, and (3) statements made about the crime by the defendant shortly after the incident and at the arraignment.

Our rejection in *People v Byrd*(106 AD2d 511) of codefendant Joseph Byrd’s challenge to the trial court’s failure to submit to the jury the question of whether the eyewitness was an accomplice is equally applicable to the instant appeal.

We further find that the court properly determined that the defendant’s inculpatory statement, made as he was leaving the courtroom after his arraignment, was spontaneous and therefore not subject to suppression. A review of the record clearly discloses that the Assistant District Attorney’s re*820sponse to the inquiry by the court, as to the crimes the defendant was being charged with, was not intended to evoke the defendant’s later incriminatory statement to the effect that "he did it, but he didn’t intend or didn’t mean to kill the person” *(see, People v Rivers,*56 NY2d 476, *rearg denied*57 NY2d 775; *People v Lynes,*49 NY2d 286; *People v Maerling,*46 NY2d 289; *People v Paul,*116 AD2d 746; *People v Sawyer,*107 AD2d 1045).

The defendant raises numerous other arguments for reversal. We have considered those challenges preserved for review as a matter of law and conclude that they do not warrant reversal of his conviction. Lazer, J. P., Gibbons, Weinstein and Lawrence, JJ., concur.
III 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. CON. RES. 63 

Correcting the enrollment of S. 2367. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

DECEMBER 18 (legislative day, DECEMBER 17), 2012 

Mr. CONRAD submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 

considered and agreed to 

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 

Correcting the enrollment of S. 2367. 

1 Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives 

2 concurring), That the Secretary of the Senate is requested 

3 to return to the House of Representatives the enrolled bill 

4 (S. 2367, an Act to strike the word ‘‘lunatic’’ from Fed5 eral law, and for other purposes). Upon the return of such 

6 bill, the action of the Speaker of the House of Representa7 tives in signing it shall be rescinded. The Secretary of the 

8 Senate shall reenroll the bill with the following correction: 

9 In section 2(b)(1)(B), strike ‘‘in subsection (b)’’ and insert 

10 ‘‘in subsection (j)’’. 

Æ 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with
# C_2020027EN.01002101.xml

| 27.1.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 27/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.1.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 27/21

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof (Germany) lodged on 24 October 2019 — B-GmbH v D Tax Office

(Case C-797/19)

(2020/C 27/27)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesfinanzhof

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant and appellant in the appeal on a point of law: B-GmbH

Defendant and respondent in the appeal on a point of law: D Tax Office

Question referred

Is Article 107(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to be interpreted as meaning that State aid falling within the scope of that provision exists if, under the legislation of a Member State, losses incurred (on a permanent basis) by an incorporated company as a result of an economic activity carried out without remuneration that is sufficient to covers costs are to be regarded, in principle, as covert distributions of profits and, accordingly, must not reduce the profits of an incorporated company but, nevertheless, those legal consequences are not to be applied for permanently loss-making business activities in the case of incorporated companies in which the majority of voting rights are directly or indirectly held by legal persons governed by public law, if they carry out the activities concerned for reasons of transport, environmental, social, cultural, educational or health policy?

---
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

Inconnection with the Annual Report of Kentucky Bancshares, Inc. (the “Company”)on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2008 as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,Gregory J. Dawson, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:

 

(1)   The Report fully complieswith the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)   The information contained inthe Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial conditionand result of operations of the Company.

 

 

|   |   | /s/  Gregory J. Dawson   |
|--------|--------|--------------------------|
|   |   | Chief  Financial Officer |
|   |   |                     |
|   |   | March 30,  2009     |

 

Asigned original of this written statement required by Section 906 has beenprovided to Kentucky Bancshares, Inc. and will be retained by KentuckyBancshares, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commissionor its staff upon request.

 

----
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D2022

- 0884

_____________________________
N. D.
, Appellant,

v.

A GENCY FOR P ERSONS WITH D ISABILITIES , Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Department of Children and Families. Allison Smith

- Dossou
, Hearing Officer

.

November 7, 2023

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

.
R OBERTS , R AY , and K ELSEY , JJ. , concur.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________2 Matthew A. Gripp of Seminole County Bar Association Legal Aid Society, Inc., Longwood; Marissa A. O'Connor of Community Legal Service of Mid Florida, Orlando
, for Appellant.

Francis Carbone, General Counsel, and Carrie McNamara, Chief Appellate Counsel, Agency for Person s with Disabilities, Tallahassee
, for Appellee.
Exhibit 32.3



THANKSGIVING COFFEE COMPANY, INC.



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION
1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the
Annual Report of Thanksgiving Coffee Company, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, the undersigned
Chief Financial Officer of the Company hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:



| | (i) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (ii) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company for the periods presented
therein.
| | ---- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/ Sam KraynekChief Financial OfficerMarch 23, 2005
# C_2019423EN.01003001.xml

| 16.12.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 423/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.12.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 423/30

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Rīgas apgabaltiesas Civillietu tiesu kolēģija (Latvia) lodged on 17 October 2019 — SIA ‘CV-Online Latvia’ v SIA ‘Melons’

(Case C-762/19)

(2019/C 423/37)

Language of the case: Latvian

Referring court

Rīgas apgabaltiesas Civillietu tiesu kolēģija

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant at first instance and respondent: SIA ‘CV-Online Latvia’

Defendant at first instance and appellant: SIA ‘Melons’

Questions referred

| 1. | Should the defendant’s activities, which consist in using a hyperlink to redirect end users to the applicant’s website, where they can consult a database of job advertisements, be interpreted as falling within the definition of ‘re-utilisation’ in Article 7(2)(b) of the Directive of 11 March 1996 (1) on the legal protection of databases, more specifically, as the re-utilisation of the database by another form of transmission? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Should the defendant’s activities, which consist in using a hyperlink to redirect end users to the applicant’s website, where they can consult a database of job advertisements, be interpreted as falling within the definition of ‘re-utilisation’ in Article 7(2)(b) of the Directive of 11 March 1996 (1) on the legal protection of databases, more specifically, as the re-utilisation of the database by another form of transmission?

| 2. | Should the information containing the meta tags that is shown in the defendant’s search engine be interpreted as falling within the definition of ‘extraction’ in Article 7(2)(a) of the Directive of 11 March 1996 on the legal protection of databases, more specifically, as the permanent or temporary transfer of all or a substantial part of the contents of a database to another medium by any means or in any form? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Should the information containing the meta tags that is shown in the defendant’s search engine be interpreted as falling within the definition of ‘extraction’ in Article 7(2)(a) of the Directive of 11 March 1996 on the legal protection of databases, more specifically, as the permanent or temporary transfer of all or a substantial part of the contents of a database to another medium by any means or in any form?

---

(1)  Directive 96/9/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 1996 on the legal protection of databases (OJ 1996 L 77, p. 20).

---
IV 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. CON. RES. 29 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 26, 2011 

Referred to the Committee on House Administration 

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 

Authorizing the use of the rotunda of the United States 

Capitol for an event to present the Congressional Gold 

Medal, collectively, to Neil A. Armstrong, Edwin E. 

‘‘Buzz’’ Aldrin, Jr., Michael Collins, and John Herschel 

Glenn, Jr., in recognition of their significant contributions to society. 

1 Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives 

2 concurring), 

3 SECTION 1. USE OF THE ROTUNDA OF THE UNITED STATES 

4 CAPITOL TO PRESENT THE CONGRESSIONAL 

5 GOLD MEDAL. 

6 (a) AUTHORIZATION.—The rotunda of the United 

7 States Capitol is authorized to be used on November 16, 

8 2011 for the presentation of the Congressional Gold 

9 Medal, collectively, to Neil A. Armstrong, Edwin E. 

10 ‘‘Buzz’’ Aldrin, Jr., Michael Collins, and John Herschel 


emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

SCON 29 RFH 

1 Glenn, Jr., in recognition of their significant contributions 

2 to society. 

3 (b) PREPARATIONS.—Physical preparations for the 

4 conduct of the event described in subsection (a) shall be 

5 carried out in accordance with such conditions as may be 

6 prescribed by the Architect of the Capitol. 

Passed the Senate September 23, 2011. 

Attest: NANCY ERICKSON, 

Secretary. 


emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 10.7



 Exhibit 10.7 
 Summary Translation of Lease Agreement 
 Party A: Bao Xian
(hereinafter referred as “Party A”) 
 (Bao Xian is the spouse of the Chief Executive Officer of Dehaier Medical Systems Limited)

 Party B: Beijing Dehaier Medical Technology Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred as “Party B”) 
 Party A and Party B have achieved mutual agreements on the following items: 
 I Location 
 Party A agrees to lease space at 1223 Epoch Center, No. 31Zi Zhu Yuan
Road, Haidian District, Beijing (100089) to Party B, with a total rentable area of 263 square meters. 
 II Leasing Period

 The leasing period is from January 1st, 2010 to December 31st, 2011.

 III Rent 
 The
monthly rent is RMB17,000 (Renminbi Seventeen Thousand Yuan). 
 IV Type of payment 
 1. The rent should be paid monthly by cash or check. 
 2. Without Party A’s agreement, if Party B does not pay the rent in this agreement as scheduled, Party B should pay a late fee of 30% of the payment in arrears, while Party A has the right to stop providing property service and
facilities to Party B. If Party B makes payment more than 10 days after due, Party B will be considered to have breached this agreement, and Party A will have the right to terminate this contract and retake the leased space. 
 V Renewal 
 Party A should send a request
letter of renewal to Party B before the expiration of the lease. If Party B agrees to re-let the premises, the two parties shall sign a renewal agreement 2 months before the expiration date. Party B has the priority to renew the lease. After the due
date, this agreement will be terminated. 
 VI Lease expiration 
 If Party B does not renew the lease after the due date, it should move away from the leased address mentioned above. If Party B defaults on its rent or delays financial settlement, it will be charged with
doubled daily rent per day. 
 VII During the contract period, the two parties should not sublet or subcontract the apartment mentioned
above. Such actions will be considered a violation of this agreement. 
 VIII Special agreements 
 1. Party A provides a standard office with normal water supply, power supply, heating and property service. Party B should always negotiate with Party A for
fitting-out works. 
 2. The two parties will not bear any cost of damages due to force majeure. 
 3. Any amendments to this agreement will require the consent of both parties.
# C_2021098EN.01002501.xml

| 22.3.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 98/25 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.3.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 98/25

---

Judgment of the General Court of 3 February 2021 — Ramazani Shadary v Council

(Case T-122/19) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures adopted in view of the situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo - Freezing of funds - Retention of the applicant’s name on the lists of persons covered - Obligation to state reasons - Right to be heard - Proof that inclusion and retention on the lists is well founded - Manifest error of assessment - Continuation of the factual and legal circumstances which led to the adoption of the restrictive measures - Right to private and family life - Presumption of innocence - Proportionality - Plea of illegality)

(2021/C 98/27)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Emmanuel Ramazani Shadary (Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo) (represented by: T. Bontinck, P. De Wolf, A. Guillerme and T. Payan, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: J.-P. Hix, H. Marcos Fraile, S. Van Overmeire and M.-C. Cadilhac, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment, first, of Council Decision (CFSP) 2018/1940 of 10 December 2018 amending Decision 2010/788/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic Republic of the Congo (OJ 2018 L 134, p. 47) and, second, Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/1931 of 10 December 2018 implementing Article 9 of Regulation (EC) No 1183/2005 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against persons acting in violation of the arms embargo with regard to the Democratic Republic of the Congo (OJ 2018 L 314, p. 1), in so far as those acts concern the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Mr Emmanuel Ramazani Shadary to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Mr Emmanuel Ramazani Shadary to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 139, 15.4.2019.

---
III 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. CON. RES. 64 

Authorizing the use of the rotunda of the Capitol for the lying in state 

of the remains of the late Honorable Daniel K. Inouye. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

DECEMBER 18 (legislative day, DECEMBER 17), 2012 

Mr. REID (for himself and Mr. MCCONNELL) submitted the following 

concurrent resolution; which was considered and agreed to 

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 

Authorizing the use of the rotunda of the Capitol for the 

lying in state of the remains of the late Honorable Daniel 

K. Inouye. 

1 Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives 

2 concurring), That in recognition of the long and distin3 guished service rendered to the Nation by Daniel K. 

4 Inouye, a Senator from the State of Hawaii and formerly 

5 a Representative from that State, his remains be per6 mitted to lie in state in the rotunda of the Capitol on De7 cember 20, 2012, and the Architect of the Capitol, under 

8 the direction of the Speaker of the House of Representa9 tives and the President pro tempore of the Senate, shall 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with 
2 

•SCON 64 ATS 

1 take all necessary steps for the accomplishment of that 

2 purpose. 

Æ 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with
Filed by sedaredgar.com - Paperfree Medical Solutions, Inc. - Exhibit 10.01






EXHIBIT 10-01

PAPERFREE MEDICAL SOLUTIONS, INC.
(the "Company")

CONSENT TO ACT AS DIRECTOR

I hereby consent to act as a director, President, Secretary,
and Treasurer of the Company and acknowledge that I am not disqualified to
become or to act as a director under Chapter 78 of the Nevada Revised
Statutes.

I hereby confirm that:

1. I am not under the age of 18 years;

2. I have not been found by a court, in the United States of
America or elsewhere, to be incapable of managing my own affairs;

3. I am not an undischarged bankrupt; and

4. I have not been convicted in or out of Nevada of an offence
in connection with the promotion, formation or management of a corporation or
unincorporated business, or of an offence involving fraud.

In addition, the undersigned hereby consents to the holding of
any meeting of the directors or of a committee of the directors of the Company
by means of such telephonic, electronic or other communication facility, as
permit all persons participating in the subject meetings to communicate
adequately with each other.

This consent shall continue in effect from year to year so long
as the undersigned is re-elected to the board of directors, provided that in the
event that the undersigned revokes this consent or resigns from the board of
directors, this consent shall cease to have effect from the date of receipt in
writing by the Company of such revocation or resignation, as the case may be,
or, if the latter, the effective date of such resignation.

DIRECTORS HAVE SUBSTANTIAL DUTIES AND OBLIGATIONS AND MAY BE
SUBJECT TO SIGNIFICANT LIABILITIES. THE PERSON SIGNING THIS CONSENT SHOULD
OBTAIN INDEPENDENT LEGAL ADVICE.


	Dated 	December 18th , 2009 
	Print name 	Ira Frohman 
	Address 	4706 SW 13th , 
	  	Deerfield Beach, FL 33442 
	  	  
	Signature 	/s/:
      Ira Frohman
Exhibit
      32





CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO


18
      U.S.C.
      SECTION 1350,


AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
      connection with the Annual Report of Bullion River Gold Corp. (the "Registrant")
      on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2006, as filed with the
      Commission on the date hereof (the "Annual Report"), we, Peter M. Kuhn, Chief
      Executive Officer and Nancy Huber, Chief Financial Officer of the Registrant,
      certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
      906
      of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(1)
      The
      Annual Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d)
      of
      the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





(2)
      The
      information contained in the Annual Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the
      Registrant.





Dated:
                April 4, 2007
            /s/
                Peter M. Kuhn


Peter
      M.
      Kuhn


Chief
      Executive Officer


and
      Director





Dated:
                April 4, 2007
            /s/
                Nancy Huber


Nancy
      Huber


Chief
      Financial Officer,


and
      Director